Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gear & Equipment' started by zero_point_two, Apr 22, 2021.
IT DOESN'T LIKE FRACTAL?!
WE KILLS IT!!!!
Manuals are incredibly helpful. And honestly, if it’s something as important to you as your voice on the instrument and as much as some of us are willing to spend on them, you’d think the manual would be necessary study material before or during first plug-in.
As far as sounding like yourself, that’s inevitable. You can only do so much about that without fundamentally changing parts of how you play. Which may or may not change other parts of your voice on the instrument. Either own your voice or be upset with it.
All that said, I’m hoping to get into school for electrical engineering this year so I can take that information and start tweaking physical amps. Tweaking stuff virtually is fun, doing it with physical stuff is more fun.
It’d take quite a bit for me to have an analog rig at this point, but I still love amps and want a nice collection of them simply because I’m a gear nerd.
That was definitely the case pre-Cygnus, however, most high gain amps, when paired with a proper IR, are ready to go right at noon. I’m working on a video going over this just because I think it’s the most glaring evidence of the changes that Cygnus brought on.
However, you’re still spot on in regards to the Mesa’s. There’s no way in hell those are ever going to sound good at noon in a Fractal unit. 5150, CCV, BE/HBE, Engl’s and Splawns all sounded killer right at noon and I find one more every time I start trying out new amps.
The reverse is also true, though, there's a Quad Core cult that's also in aggressive damage control/crusade mode right now too going out of their way to write off other modelers and argue why their Quad Core is the one true way to tonal bliss.
And, the two things that seem odd about this post to me, are 1) this guy had no prior ties to this community, and signed up to say how unhappy he was with a Fractal and how happy he was with a Quad Core, and as of last I checked hadn't made a single other post on this forum outside of this thread, and 2) he claims to have used a device that sounded "a little flat, a little flubby, and drowned in the mix" for more than a year, while also being the sort of person who claims to have tried every single parameter within the AxeFX, so clearly is no stranger to incessant tweaking, and did this for over a year before he tried anything else out. If you're that unhappy with a piece of hardware, and have spent THAT much time getting under the skin with it, it's awfully hard to imagine at some point after only a month or two you wouldn't just catch one of those $50 sales on a Neural plugin just to try something else.
tl;dr - this reads a lot like the post of someone with an axe to grind and trying to generate some positive buzz for Neural to offset some of the debacle of the rollout of their Quad Core, who is going out of their way to create the impression of knowing the unit intimately to front run "you just don't know how to dial it in" rebuttals.
And, again, it's not like I personally give a shit - I'm pretty happy with my current recording chain, and the only time I really use any amp modeling is the old LePou plugins just for songwriting so I can do seamless punches as song ideas evolve. I'm a real amp guy through and through. This post just feels off to me.
OP pulled the ole quip n' dip.
Probably realized it wasn't worth arguing over the internet or sinking more time into one piece of gear when another piece of gear did what he wanted.
What is this madness ?
...yet one more reason why I'm really struggling to take this thread at face value.
I always find funny when OP disappears but the thread remains alive
In the modern guitar amp modeling world the AxeFx does not disappoint the guitarist, the guitarist disappoints the AxeFx!
im pretty sure I see little tears stream down mine every time I butcher the Lay It Down riff.